
Many have asked me why I do this or how I became active in Apologetics. I have provided the following Testimony if you will, in an effort to articulate this process. It is in 3 Acts, the first being longer than the following two.
This story starts over 20 years ago living in Utah. (And learning for the first time about Mormon theology and who authored their doctrines.)
Act I.
I am a cradle Catholic. It's not that I took my faith for granted for 30+ years, I didn't, I felt I was a good Catholic, I knew What Catholics believed but not always WHY we believed it. (A problem with many Christians). This was challenged by my wife who 10 years ago was given a book by some anti-Catholic friends called "Roman Catholicism" by Loraine Boettner.
See: The Anti-Catholic Bible
It presented many charges against the Catholic Church.
I didn't know how to answer the book or these charges. I knew it was wrong,, or was it??? I was ignorant of WHY I believed what I believed and I was ignorant of who the author of my theology was.
(Perhaps this is why some Catholics fall into Protestantism, they are extremely ignorant of WHY they believe what they believe, and like most Protestants, they don't know the origins of their theology).
I asked myself: "was my whole faith a hoax, was it not true"? I had to find out for I had always just wanted to believe as the Apostles taught the early Church. I'm sure that can be said of all Christians although they have probably never considered their theology in that light.
Since our Lord never wrote anything down, the writings of his Apostles and what they taught the early Church was the closest I could come to the teachings of Jesus Christ. In essence, I had to find out if the Doctrines of the Catholic Faith were really "Apostolic." Were they what the Apostles taught the early Church or were they truly as so many Protestants claim: "Traditions of man"? To be true to our Lord and for the salvation of my soul I had to find out and accept what ever I discovered, even if I didn't like it or if it changed my entire life, social circle and belief system. But I felt I had the courage to do this.
Was this book True? Is that what Catholicism really was? Did they really believe the things this book stated? This started an investigation, a quest and many prayers. It fostered many discussions with my wife about what we believe and WHY we believe it. We attended many Protestant Churches during that time and I observed what I knew of Protestantism from before, that each Church has a different "spin" if you will on the teachings of Jesus Christ. I have since studied Protestantism and it's origins at great length. I feel I have a good outlook on Protestantism and what it teaches. I would hesitate to say that I know more of most denominations than the parishioners themselves. This was a slow process but it evolved into essentially the following logic.
1. Any document/book can be viewed/interpreted in many ways. I.e. the US Constitution, the Koran or even the Bible.
2. Any passage can be interpreted in many ways and read in or out of context. I.e. Osama Bin Ladin's version of the Koran or David Koresh's version of the Bible, the Mormons version of the Bible, the Catholic interpretation of the Bible or the 20,000+ Protestant denominational interpretations of the Bible.
3. Questions: What is the proper context that a book/document should be read in? Should it be a Lutheran context? A Calvinistic Context? A Baptist context? Etc,. or a Catholic Context? Why do we believe it is the proper context? On what *Authority* do we proclaim that our personal interpretation (or that of who ever we choose) is the proper context? Does anyone in historical Christianity agree with this interpretation?
4. This is what I found to be of most significance in my search for truth. Is there any historical precedent for the context we take as true, i.e. is this interpretation a NEW interpretation? Or is it what Christians have ALWAYS believed about the subject? Is our interpretation "Apostolic"? Is it what the Apostles taught the early Church or does it have no support prior to a certain year/century?
5. This follows that if the interpretation is NEW, it must be rejected. For a new and modern interpretation of an ancient book or scroll cannot logically be what the Apostles taught the early Church 2000 years ago. That is sound logic. I would hope most sober Christians would agree with this logic.
I was forced to "test" Protestant and Catholic Doctrines against this logic.
“Test everything. Hold on to the good. Avoid every kind of evil.” 1 Thessalonians 5:21-22
Again it was a long process, I remember going to a Promise Keepers convention with my two best friends who are Protestant. When they asked for the "Alter Call" I went. I did not go to be "Saved" or to "accept Christ,," I felt that I had already accepted him. And I didn't believe one could simply say the sinner's prayer and be saved forever for that contradicts scripture and the tradition of Christ's Apostles.
Click here: Our Christian Fathers and the Holy Scriptures on Mortal Sin
As I got on my Knees my friend put his hand on my head. I cried and prayed that I would have the courage to profess my faith without fear. For at the time I did not really do so. I had it, but I kept it to myself. My friend later told my wife that he felt like a Channel of the Holy Sprit and that God's grace was flowing from his hand.
So I did start professing my faith. And what I had learned from my quest. I found that All Catholic Doctrines are indeed Apostolic. Not because of my personal opinion on the Bible, but because it is what Christians have "always" believed. It is the Faith of the Apostles because Christian, Secular and Jewish History tell us so. Not because "I" say it's so, or my pastor, or my Mom or Dad. It documented history from numerous and various sources to include the Holy Bible.
Just as before Thomas Edison there was no light bulbs. I found the same thing with Protestant doctrines. Before the middle ages, there was no concept/idea or notion of Protestant doctrines. The light bulb was invented in the 19th century, and likewise we can point to the man and the century for Every Protestant Doctrine. It's just history. Protestant theology is not Apostolic. How can these ideas be Apostolic when they were invented a few hundred years ago? So in line with the logic above, It must be rejected for the salvation of souls and to be true to our Lord Jesus Christ who's Apostles taught but ONE Gospel. Gal 1:8-9 tells us:
"As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that you have received, let him be accursed."
Act II.
My wife was given another book by yet another Anti Catholic. He actually went to my house to drop it off to my wife while I was gone. This man is a professional Anti-Catholic for his sole monetary livelihood is made from him "ministry" that has for years tried to destroy the Church Christ started in Matt 16:16-19. He does this through his web site, books, articles and speeches. He is actually an Elder at a Baptist Church. His name is James White.
Because of his books and the lack of historical data in them, I started corresponding with him a few years ago. I found him very good at attacking the Catholic Church, but when asked for one "shred" of historical evidence to substantiate his Protestant beliefs, he either changed the subject, obfuscated, or refused to answer. To this day he will no longer answer my questions.
It was James that got me involved in Apologetics. For all the damage he has tried to inflict, he lit a fire under me against those who attack and misrepresent (either intentionally or unintentionally) the Apostolic Catholic faith. If one wants to disagree with what the Catholic faith teaches that is fine. As long as what they disagree with is what Catholic Theology actually teaches. James is better than most in this area of being accurate, but he is silent on finding any Apostolic link for (distinctive) Protestant theology(ies). And without an Apostolic link, one can call this idea Biblical or that idea Biblical at will, but if the Apostles didn't teach it to the early Church,,, it's not Biblical.
Act III
So that is where I am today. I defend the Catholic Faith against those who misrepresent and distort it or present it to those who are ignorant of it or have never considered it before. And in keeping with Christ's commandment in Matt 28:20, I try to explain to my non-Catholic Friends Christ's ONE Gospel. Not "my version" of it or Calvin's or Luther's version, but the Faith of the Apostles as evidenced by what Christians have always believed.
I preach the "One, Holy, Catholic And Apostolic Faith". (Nicene Creed 325 A.D.).
That is why I have created the following web site challenging my Protestant brothers and sisters to examine their faith for the ONE truth of Jesus Christ:
A Case for Catholicism, the Origins of Protestant theology.
I seek to light a fire under them. To provide the real evidence for what they believe and who invented their beliefs. To demonstrate to my Non Catholic Brothers and Sisters who the Author is of both theologies, Catholic and Protestant. Was the author Jesus Christ as taught by his Apostles?
Or were their doctrines or ideas of Christ invented by Renaissance era Philosophers 1500+ years after St. John the Apostle died on the island of Patmos?
Just as before Thomas Edison there was no such thing as the light bulb, before the middle ages there was no such thing as a Protestant doctrine. Did Protestantism exist before Luther and Calvin? No. How on earth then could these doctrines then be Apostolic, i.e. the teachings of Christ's Apostles to his early Church?
That I believe is my Testimony. I now try to communicate these truths and facts of history. Yet not everyone wants to hear the Truth or know who invented their theology, and that is the most disheartening part. Many after first believing their doctrines are Apostolic, engage me in dialogue, only to find an excuse to stop when they research and determine the author of their doctrines died but a few hundred years ago at best, and is possible alive today.
My friend, if you care at all about who authored your theology or sincerely desire to believe as the Apostles taught the early Church, please consider the following questions.
This is the Case for Catholicism. It's Apostolicity. It's unbroken link to the Apostles. It's guarantee by the Holy Scriptures to be the: "The Church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth" 1 Tim 3:15.
God Bless you,
Daniel
INRI33AD@AOL.COM
Return to homepage: A Case for Catholicism, the Origins of Protestant theology.
1. Click here: THE ORIGINS OF PROTESTANT THEOLOGY, do you know who authored your distinctive Protestant beliefs and in what century? You might be surprised.
2. Is Sola Scriptura or the "Bible Only theory" even Biblical? Have you ever read a verse to support it? Click here to read what the Bible really says about God's word and how it is to be taught.
3. Did the Bereans "Search the Scriptures" and thereby follow the Bible Only Theory? Not if you read the whole chapter, i.e., the verses not taught in Protestantism. Read the story again, but read the whole chapter, not just the selected verse. Click here
4. Biblically, did the "teachings or doctrines" of the Catholic Church become corrupt? Don't the Holy Scriptures say this is impossible?
5. Click here for the "7 Stages of Christian Spiritual Development", where are you? Click here and find out what stage you are in.
6. Click here for the very words of our Apostolic Christian Fathers quoting Scripture on the Catholic doctrines you've been taught are UNBiblical.
7. Faith Alone (Sola Fide): It is a Catholic position! Have you been taught in your Church that Catholics must work their way to Heaven? Click here for the real story.